Pros And Cons Of Xenotransplantation

Jurassic World was a jaw-dropping movie; however, in reality, cloning can have much more significant applications than simply making a dinosaur zoo. Ever since biologists have taken an interest in cloning in the late 1800's, many findings has progressed our knowledge about cloning. In 1996, Dolly the Sheep was the first mammal to ever be cloned. It has been 17 years since that scientific discovery; biologists have now made further findings. Researchers have now transferred their technique to the cloning of human cells. This scientific breakthrough will bring new perspectives and advance our understanding of the world. I believe that you should support cloning because it has the potential to create medical miracles, help those who would wish

Cloning is inhumane and unethical because it creates animals and embryos that will be used for painful research experiments. Additionally, a painful surgery is required to remove the eggs from the breeding stock and implant the embryos back into them. Also, a good deal of the animals that survive past infancy have abnormalities and health problems that include respiratory distress, brain lesions, metabolic problems, skeletal malfunctions, and

     As soon as you mention the word cloning, you are most likely to ignite a debate. This is because people are greatly divided on whether it's good or bad. A way to reach a conclusion is to look at cloning from ethical, risk, and religious perspectives. The reality is, cloning is unethical, very risky, and irreligious. The arguments I will make will hopefully convince you that cloning is not good for the future.

In a situation where one needs certain organs to stay alive, rather than being put on a waitlist that takes forever before one gets an organ that is somewhat viable only to realise that the organ is not being accepted in their body is an unfortunate predicament. With therapeutic cloning the organs are an exact match to the DNA of the patient in need, there is no long wait associated with it and it reduces harm. The Pros of therapeutic cloning outweigh that of the cons and because of that I support it, it could bring about incredible advancements in the cell technology research and help in bettering the lives of people who are faced with problems that could be easily solved with the use of embryonic stem cells. Niccolo Machiavelli once said “The end justifies the mean”. This statements means that regardless of the method used to achieve a certain goal as long as the end result is good regardless of what type of method was used, it is excused. This can be applied to SCNT, because although people do not believe in the methods of achieving the embryonic stem cells, the outcome will potentially be beneficial to

people believe that it is too risky and unethical. Reproductive cloning has shown advantages and

There are many good reasons to both develop cloning and incorporate it into modern medicine. Human cloning is extremely beneficial, but there are some downsides. Many of the problems are ethical in nature. Matthew Nisbet involved the public in his article. He polled the public on their opinions about human cloning and stem cell research. He found that “The public appears to have strong reservations about research that destroys embryos”

There are many arguments against cloning. Leon R. Kass bases his argument on repugnance in his article The Wisdom of Repugnance. He is a well-known physician, educator and scientist. Kass perceives cloning as offensive, grotesque revolting, repulsive and wrong. To establish his argument he states, “Most people recoil from the prospect of mass production or human being, with large clones of look-alikes, compromised in their individuality.”1 His rationale is cloning is unnatural, because it is asexual and requires only one parent. Kass believes that cloning turns natural procreation into a manufactured process, which is not natural or moral. In his essay he also points out that cloning will also change the way we see ourselves through our

     The audience for this paper is comprised of those readers looking to gain knowledge on the issue of xenotransplantation. This group of people is unaware of the dynamics of the ethical arguments surrounding this current issue. This audience does not have a specific age or belief, reflecting the varied positions of the argument. Due to this hunger for factual information, they do not wish to have someone else’s views imposed on them. Instead, they wish to define and establish a view of their own.      

There should be no room to clone any human being nor animal. There is so much more to find out about our world then to test the non-achieved and inefficient process of cloning. Therefore I am against any type of cloning, whether therapeutic or reproductive. Andy vidak I write to you this letter, to give you a better understanding of why funding for cloning would set us back as a society. Genuinely I care about our future because I want our generation to be known as the one who did brilliant things. The excuse that cloning can potentially result in medical breakthrough is unacceptable because, like president George W. Bush said in his 2002 speech about human cloning, “We can pursue medical research with a clear sense of moral purpose.” (Office of the Press Secretary par. 12). Research cloning would contradict the most underlying principle of medical ethics, that no human life should be exploited for the convenience of another. For that reason I stand by

Human cloning is capable of aiding doctors and medical researchers in creating new medical treatments and therapies, which is also

People base their arguments concerning cloning off of norms, and with that, they ignore the possible benefits of this technology. Cloning technology may possibly benefit us in a lot of ways. It could potentially be used to reverse heart attacks, infertility, treat defective genes, and treat brain damage such as Alzheimer and Parkinson. With all the benefits behind this technology, reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning should be legalized for research, experiments, and future use.

This research has a lot of risks, but the potential outcomes are spectacular. The production of embryonic stem cells could help so many people. People could theoretically be created new tissue for them to use if lost. The immune system, in theory, should not reject the new tissue, due to it being an exact copy. This has been a major concern when it comes to any kinds of transplants. This could resolve that issue and save many lives in the process.

Opponents of the research argue that embryonic stem cell technologies are a slippery slope to reproductive cloning and can fundamentally devalue human life. Some in the pro-life movement argue that a human embryo is already a human life that is entitled to protection. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) has recommended a ban on human cloning due to the threats it poses to people’s safety. The NBAC position is that, “It is important to recognize that the technique that produced Dolly the sheep was successful in only 1 of 277 attempts. If attempted in humans, it would pose the risk of hormonal manipulation in the egg donor; multiple miscarriages in birth mother; and possibly severe developmental abnormalities in any resulting child.” ("HubPages") With all these risks at hand I do not think it makes sense to continue with stem cell research when there are other methods.

The first problem that human cloning encounter is it is one of unethical processes because it involves the alteration of the human genetic and human may be harmed, either during experimentation or by expectations after birth. “Cloning, like all science, must be used responsibly. Cloning human is not desirable. But cloning sheep has its uses.”, as quoted by Mary Seller, a member of the Church of England’s Board of Social Responsibility (Amy Logston, 1999). Meaning behind this word are showing us that cloning have both advantages and disadvantages. The concept of cloning is hurting many human sentiments and human believes. “Given the high rates of morbidity and mortality in the cloning of other mammals, we believe that cloning-to-produce-children would be extremely unsafe, and that attempts to produce a cloned child would be highly unethical”, as quoted by the President’s Council on Bioethics. Since human cloning deals with human life, it said to be unethical if people are willing to killed embryo or infant to produce a cloned human and advancing on it. The probability of this process is successful is also small because the technology that being used in this process is still new and risky.

There are also many negative aspects of cloning. To create different organs or limbs in order to help a person to live longer or more comfortably seems to go against nature. The way human life should be created is through sexual intercourse. Harmond Varmus, a schoolteacher, said it best; “Human cloning represents a grave attack on the dignity of conception and on the right an unrepeatable, unpredetermined set of genes.” To clone an animal is almost the same thing. We are playing with the way humans and animals have reproduced for years. Is it fair that we clone and then kill an animal just for its organs in order to save a person’s life? Scientists are not even sure that the animal’s organs will be compatible with the human body. According to the Medical Research